Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of electronic audit and feedback interventions identified by the review

From: A systematic review of electronic audit and feedback: intervention effectiveness and use of behaviour change theory

Study ID

Linder et al. 2010 [38]

Peiris et al. 2015 [40, 41]

Thomas et al. 2007 [39]

Carney et al. 2011 [33, 37]

Carlhed et al. 2006 [34]

Guldberg et al. 2011 [36]

Gude et al. 2016 [35]

Study design

CRCT

CRCT

CRCT

RCT

RCT

CRCT

CRCT

A&F domain

Prescribing and management of drugs, acute care management

Prescribing and management of drugs, guide primary prevention and screening

Chronic disease management

Guide primary prevention and screening

Acute care management

Chronic disease management

Chronic care management

Feedback recipients

Physicians

Physicians

Physicians

Physicians

Interdisciplinary clinical teams

Interdisciplinary clinical teams

Interdisciplinary clinical teams

Direction of change required

Reduce current behaviour

Increase current behaviour

Unclear

Reduce current behaviour

Increase current behaviour

Increase current behaviour

Increase current behaviour

A&F implementation

EHR-integrated tools

Web panel screens

Software panel screens

Web panel screens

Web panel screens

Distributed as software update

Web panel screens

Interactive A&F component

Drill down to patient level; select indicators for feedback

Drill down to patient level; select indicators for feedback

Choose presentation mode

Select indicators for feedback

Select indicators for feedback

Drill down to patient level; select indicators for feedback

Select indicators for action plan

Feedback presentation mode

Graphical summaries

Graphical summaries

Text summaries

Unclear

Graphical summaries

Tabular data, graphical summaries

List summaries, with ‘traffic light’ icons

Frequency of feedback updates

Monthly (automatically)

Bi-monthly (automatically)

Bi-monthly (automatically)

Every login

Real-time

3 times (month 1, month 3, month 12) during the trial by software update

Quarterly

Target goals basis

National CDC recommendations

Australian medical guideline recommendations

National evidence-based guideline recommendations

Radiologist defined their own goals

National evidence-based guideline recommendations

National evidence-based guideline recommendations

National evidence-based guideline recommendations

Action planning used

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Benchmarks and comparators

Clinician vs peer average performance vs national benchmark (identified through expert analysis)

Peer-ranked performance data benchmarked against participating trial sites

Clinician vs aggregate average resident performance (based on Institute for clinical systems improvement targets)

Radiologist performance vs trial peers’ performance vs achievable national benchmarks

Local team vs average trial peers’ performance; local team vs national average performance

Local practice performance vs average performance of trial peers

Local team-based performance vs. peer performance (calculated as achievable benchmarks)

Intervention duration (months)

9

12

12

21

18

14

19.8 and 22.5a

Participants in study (n)

Primary care practices (27)

Primary healthcare centres (60)

Clinical groups (residents) within hospital

Clinical groups (radiologists) between regional hospitals

Multi-disciplinary teams between hospitals (38)

General practices (86)

Cardiac rehabilitation

Centres (18)

Outcome type

Dichotomous process measures

Dichotomous process measures

Dichotomous process measures

Dichotomous process measures

Dichotomous process measures

Dichotomous process measures

Dichotomous process measures and patient outcomes

Comparator arm

A&F vs current practice

A&F vs current practice

A&F vs current practice

A&F vs current practice

Head-to-head comparison of A&F

A&F vs current practice

Head-to-head comparison of A&F

Role of e-A&F in overall QI strategyb

Core

Moderate

Minimal

Core

Moderate

Core

Core

Baseline performance known

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Risk of bias

Medium

Low

Medium

Unclear

High

Medium

Low

  1. Abbreviations: A&F audit and feedback, CRCT cluster randomised controlled trial, RCT randomised controlled trial, CDC Centre for Disease Control, QI quality improvement
  2. aAverage length of study period per centre in both arms of the intervention (from table 2 [35]). bOn a 3-point scale (minimal, moderate and core).
  3. Study-specific risk of bias assessment can be found in Additional file 4